linux-kernel - Re: [Bugfix] unregister_trace_probe needs to be called under mutex

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1277891066.1868.107.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:44:26 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Bugfix] unregister_trace_probe needs to be called under mutex

On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 14:15 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Comment in unregister_trace_probe() says probe_lock will be held
> when it gets called. However there is a case where it might called
> without the probe_lock being held. Also since we are traversing the
> probe_list and deleting an element from the probe_list, probe_lock
> should be held.
> 
> This was first pointed in uprobes traceevent review by Frederic
> Weisbecker here.  (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/12/106)
> 
> This patch is needed for both 2.6.35-rc3 and 2.6.35-rc3-tip
> 
> Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> index 4f11a56..67670cd 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> @@ -269,14 +269,17 @@ static int create_trace_probe(int argc, char **argv)
>  			pr_info("Delete command needs an event name.\n");
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		}
> +		mutex_lock(&probe_lock);
>  		tp = find_probe_event(event, group);
>  		if (!tp) {
> +			mutex_unlock(&probe_lock);
>  			pr_info("Event %s/%s doesn't exist.\n", group, event);
>  			return -ENOENT;
>  		}
>  		/* delete an event */
>  		unregister_trace_probe(tp);
>  		free_trace_probe(tp);
> +		mutex_unlock(&probe_lock);
>  		return 0;
>  	}

Shouldn't all that go through steven's ->reg() interface?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/